Context-sensitive half-time and anesthesia: How does theory match reality?

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 443-448

  Keifer, John ^a   Glass, Peter ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANESTHETIC AGENT; MUSCLE RELAXANT AGENT; NARCOTIC AGENT;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG ELIMINATION; DRUG HALF LIFE; HUMAN; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TIME;

EID: 0032699603     PISSN: 09527907     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00001503-199908000-00009     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Fisher DM, Rosen JI. A pharmacokinetic explanation for increasing recovery time following larger or repeated doses of nondepolarizing muscle relaxants. Anesthesiology 1986; 65:286-291.
2. Gibaldi M, Perrier D. Pharmacokinetics (revised and expanded 2nd ed.). New York and Basel: Marcel Dekker, Inc.; 1982.
3. Shafer SL, Varvel JR. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and rational opioid selection. Anesthesiology 1991; 74:53-63.
4. Hughes MA, Glass PS, Jacobs JR. Context-sensitive half-time in multicompartment pharmacokinetic models for intravenous anesthetic drugs. Anesthesiology 1992; 76:334-341.
5. Shafer SL, Gregg KM. Algorithms to rapidly achieve and maintain stable drug concentrations at the site of drug effect with a computer-controlled infusion pump. J Pharmacokinet Biopharmaceut 1992; 20:147-169.
6. Kapila A, Glass PS, Jacobs JR, Muir KT, Hermann DJ, Shiraishi M, et al. Measured context-sensitive half-times of remifentanil and alfentanil. Anesthesiology 1995; 8:968-975.
7. Schraag S, Mohl U, Hirsch M, Stolberg E, Geergieff M. Recovery from opioid anesthesia: the clinical implication of context-sensitive half-times. Anesth Analg 1998; 88:184-190. In this study the authors try to relate context-sensitive half-times to measured recovery times. They identify several issues that need to be considered when relating a single context-sensitive half-time to multiple recovery endpoints.
8. Varvel J, Doncho D, Schafer S. Measuring the predictive performance of computer-controlled infusion pumps. J Pharmacokinet Biopharmaceut 1992; 20:63-94.
9. Glass P, Shafer S, Reves J. Intravenous drug delivery systems. In: Anesthesia (4th ed). Miller RD (editor). New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1999.
10. Glen J. The development of the 'Diprofusor': a TCI system for propofol. Anaesthesia 1998; 53 (Suppl. 1):13-21.
11. Ginsberg B, Howell S, Glass PS, Margolis JO, Ross AK, Dear GL, et al. Pharmacokinetic model-driven infusion of fentanyl in children. Anesthesiology 1996; 85:1268-1275.
12. Scott JC, Ponganis KV, Stanski DR. EEG quantitation of narcotic effect: the comparative pharmacodynamics of fentanyl and alfentanil. Anesthesiology 1985; 62:234-241.
13. McClain D, Hug CJ. Intravenous fentanyl kinetics. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1980; 28:106-114.
14. Shafer S, Stanski D. Improving the clinical utility of anesthetic drug pharmacokinetics. Anesthesiology 1992; 76:327-330.
15. Fisher DM. (Almost) everything you leamed about pharmacokinetics was (somewhat) wrong [editorial comment]. Anesth Analg 1996; 83:901-903.
16. Gepts E. Pharmacokinetic concepts for TCI anaesthesia [published erratum appears in Anaesthesia 1998; 53:614]. Anaesthesia 1998; 53 (Suppl. 1):4-12.
17. 95 prepofol-opioid concentrations that assure adequate anesthesia and a rapid return of consciousness. Anesthesiology 1997; 87: 1549-1582.